It's not my "brand" of libertarianism. I didn't invent it. It was invented hundreds of years ago.

It's based on the Lockean principles of individual liberty and natural rights.

Your political ideology ignores these fundamental principles in favor of government mandates, restrictions and regulation.

My ideology acknowledges that some government mandates, restrictions, and regulations are required. I'm challenging you to question any one of my assertions specifically.

How about let's start with regulations? Your libertarian dogma says that all regulations need to be eliminated. My moderated approach says that some regulations could be eliminated by the vast majority need to be upheld.

Your current position is about as far as you will go. I'm saying that you know libertarianism of your sort can't be exposed to the light of day. Deal with it if you think it can.

Quote:

Sure, no prob. Unfortunately, we've really gotten into the weeds. The topic is Poverty in America.

We should be talking about that.

I'll talk about anything you like but I will always go back to challenging you to talk about your impossible libertarian agenda.

After a year taking part on this forum I can say that I haven't heard even one concrete example of how libertarianism could be applied in real life. Isn't it about time?

edit: I'm also completely happy to examine my agenda first if you prefer. I'm itching for the chance to explain my rational and moderate agenda and stand it up against yours.

Especially for Ruby, because unlike all the libertarians on this board, she continues to insist everything is just fine.

Wow Don, you continue to prove that you have bad reading comprehension. Again, we cannot improve our poverty situation with Liberal policies, especially the one where we continually allow poverty stricken people to pour into our country without permission, and then let them suck up resources that should go to those poor people who are here legally.

Liberals also want to keep the poor (who are disproportionately black) in failing public schools, where so many end up dropping out, then make babies they can't afford, and continue the cycle of poverty. Shame.

Wow Don, you continue to prove that you have bad reading comprehension. Again, we cannot improve our poverty situation with Liberal policies, especially the one where we continually allow poverty stricken people to pour into our country without permission, and then let them suck up resources that should go to those poor people who are here legally.

Liberals also want to keep the poor (who are disproportionately black) in failing public schools, where so many end up dropping out, then make babies they can't afford, and continue the cycle of poverty. Shame.

The poor in the US are disproportionally blacks. This is the key to the situation you've created in your country. And now that the racist situation has been created there's little chance of escapiing from it in the foreseeable future.

That situation hasn't been created in other modern first world countries. We should try to discuss that issue some time Ruby.

Other first world countries don't have the problem with illegal immigration that we have, a fact you continually ignore, Don.

Ruby, you have the wrong ideas completely. Read the smackdown Craig Sickler gave you on another thread then get back to me.

Craig and I agree essentially on nearly everything. It's just his problem of needing to get over admitting to me directly that we agree. That's what you're good for right now. A go between to preserve his false pride.

It's too bad you're not good for much else! Talk to thermf5; he has some good ideas that might work for you!